MFNL - Georeferencing Of Tourism Values

Author: Adam Anderson, Mapping Specialist Model Forest of Newfoundland and Labrador (January – June 2007) Project Sponsor & Partner: Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador (HNL) Contributor: Center for Environmental Excellence (CEE) College of the North Atlantic, Geospatial Research Facility Date: 2007

Geo-Referencing Tourism Values in the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor

© Model Forest of Newfoundland and Labrador Inc. (MFNL) MFNL has catalogued this Project document as follows: Geo-Referencing Tourism Values in the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor Author: Adam Anderson, Mapping Specialist, MFNL (January 2007-June 2007) Project Sponsor & Partner:

Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador (HNL) Contributor:

Centre for Environmental Excellence (CEE)

College of the North Atlantic, Geospatial Research Facility Copies of this document may be obtained from: Model Forest of Newfoundland and Labrador Inc. P. O. Box 68 Corner Brook, NL A2H 6C3 Telephone: 709-637-7300 Fax: 709-634-0255

Acknowledgements

The author would like to express gratitude to the advisory committee for the Geo-Referencing

Tourism Values in the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor pilot project. Your help and guidance

throughout the implementation of this project was necessary to achieve the end goals. A special

thanks to the project manager, Sean Dolter, who made himself available to answer questions

and provide instant feedback at any time. Thanks to all of the tourism operators who took the

time to complete the surveys, and to gave the input necessary for the implementation of the

project. It is much appreciated. Lastly, thanks to Natural Resources Canada for providing office

space and materials throughout the project.

Geo-Referencing Tourism Values in the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor PILOT PROJECT

i

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 2

Project Description ...................................................................................................................... 2

Objectives and Perceived Outcomes of the Project ................................................................... 2

Why Geo-Reference? .................................................................................................................. 3

Advisory Group and Partners ...................................................................................................... 4

Pilot Study Location ......................................................................................................................... 6

Conflicting Management Uses in Western Newfoundland ............................................................. 8

Growth of the Tourism Industry ................................................................................................. 8

Other Management Uses in Western Newfoundland ................................................................ 9

Conflict between Industries ...................................................................................................... 10

Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 16

Research .................................................................................................................................... 16

Surveying ................................................................................................................................... 17

Survey #1 .............................................................................................................................. 17

Survey #2 .............................................................................................................................. 18

Obtaining Map Data .................................................................................................................. 18

Digitizing Map Data ................................................................................................................... 19

Creating the Geo-Database ....................................................................................................... 20

Materials ................................................................................................................................... 21

Results and Discussion .................................................................................................................. 21

Businesses Surveyed ................................................................................................................. 21

Tourism Activities and Accommodations in the Corridor ......................................................... 23

Surveys ...................................................................................................................................... 24

Limitations ..................................................................................................................................... 24

Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 26

Works Cited ................................................................................................................................... 27

APPENDIX A ................................................................................................................................... 30

APPENDIX B ................................................................................................................................... 42

APPENDIX C ................................................................................................................................... 48

APPENDIX D ................................................................................................................................... 54


ii

List of Figures and Tables

Figure 1. Map showing the study location. ..................................................................................... 6

Figure 2. Simulated planned harvest block.. ................................................................................. 12

Figure 3. Hiking trail in the area that has been planned for harvest. ........................................... 13

Figure 4. A potential conflict resolution. ....................................................................................... 13

Figure 5. 3D Visualization software used to evaluate harvest areas prior to harvesting. ............ 15

Figure 6. 3D Visualization software used to evaluate harvest areas. ........................................... 15

Table 1. Operators within or near the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor ................................... 22

Table 2. Summary of tourism activities and accommodations. .................................................... 23


1

Executive Summary

The ‘Geo-Referencing of Tourism Values in the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor’ project took

place in the western region of Newfoundland in Forest Management Districts 15 and 16 from

January 2007 to June 2007. The long-term goal of this project is to build a capacity within the

tourism industry sector to manage spatial conflicts on an equitable level with other resource

dependant sectors such as forestry, mines and energy, agriculture and municipalities. For this

individual project, the main goal is to complete a pilot geo-referenced tourism values map for

the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor.

In total, 27 tourism businesses were identified in the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor. These

operators offer a wide range of tourism opportunities including many wilderness adventures,

accommodations and amenities. In total, there are 24 different wilderness activities currently

being provided by 21 operators, 13 businesses offering accommodations (ranging from lodging,

bed & breakfast, and camping), and 2 restaurants in the corridor.

Twenty-two tourism operators within the corridor were administered a Tourism Values Survey,

aimed at obtaining information about the tourism opportunities that they provide. In addition to

this, spatial hardcopy map data was acquired from all of the tourism operators who are actively

providing tourism opportunities within the corridor, showing the area of the landscape where

each tourism opportunity takes place. Using this information, map layers were created that

represent tourism opportunities in the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor. Further to this, a geo-

database was created to store the information for the tourism values in the area. The geo-

database stores spatial and attribute data, and links important information that defines each

line, point or polygon in the geo-database.


2

Introduction

Project Description

The ‘Geo-Referencing Tourism Values along the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor’ pilot project

began in order to examine an approach for tourism operators to identify their properties,

resources and values in a spatial format which may be used during forest management planning

processes. Both the forest industry and tourism sector representatives support the approach

that Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador (HNL) and the Western Newfoundland Model

Forest (WNMF) are taking to identify a process by which individual tourism operators can

delineate and geo-reference their interests and values.

This report identifies, examines and evaluates the objectives, processes and methodology used

to gather data from individual operators. The data collected from the sample participant group

represents 22 tourism operators within the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor (hereafter

occasionally referred to as "the corridor”) to gauge an understanding of tourism usage of these

operators in order to test the methodology employed to gather the data. The results do not

reflect the tourism industry as a whole in the Deer Lake to Gros Morne corridor or the western

region of Newfoundland.

Since there is little spatial representation of tourism values and related business interests in this

area, this pilot project represented an opportunity to engage tourism operators in a proposed

methodology to identify the regions, resources and values that they utilize to generate revenue

for their business. It is hoped that the spatial representation of their resources will help

individual operators better identify specific locations where land use conflicts may exist and,

hence, improve their ability to identify those values when conflicts arise.

Objectives and Perceived Outcomes of the Project

The long-term goal for the methodology used in this project is to build a capacity within the

tourism sector that would allow individual operators to manage spatial conflicts on an equitable

level with other resource dependant sectors such as forestry, mines and energy, agriculture and

municipalities.


3

For this phase, Phase I, the goal was to test the methodology (i.e. Surveys) employed to identify

tourism values and resources in the region and once completed, evaluate the methodology in its

ability to acquire the data and meet the needs of individual tourism operators in the future. At

the end of this phase, the tourism operators that participated in the pilot project will have their

values entered into a geo-database and geo-referenced on a map for future competing uses

issues or other land development conflicts. The pilot phase participants identified the use and

extent of critical forest landscapes and their associated forest elements that are considered

essential for their tourism business to be sustainable. Another goal was to create a database of

individual operators, which will link information and define relationships between tourism map

features for future projects of this nature. This will be created in, and can be accessed via ArcGIS

computer software.

The most important part of this pilot project was to evaluate the methodology used to obtain

the necessary information and to create tourism map layers for those individual operators. The

pilot project allowed the surveyor to identify both the best practices for obtaining data from

tourism operators and the limitations associated with the survey method. By choosing a specific

geographic location such as the one used in this project, the researchers and committee

members were able to focus on the design of data collection, and how to use this data to create

a final product. This pilot project provided a method which can be used in other geographic

locations within the province to achieve the same goals. It created an awareness of the level of

input necessary to geo-reference tourism values in the Province. In future phases of this project,

the surveys used for the pilot will be adapted to better suit the purpose and objectives of geo-

referencing of tourism business interests and values.

Why Geo-Reference?

Geo-referencing is the process of defining an objects existence in physical space. For example,

when collecting the latitude and longitude coordinates for a tree, one would be geo-referencing

that tree. The latitude and longitude coordinates combined, create a numerical system that

allows us to define exactly ‘where’ an object or location exists in physical space. Once something

has been geo-referenced, one can then view where it exists in space, along with other geo-

referenced objects surrounding it. This in turn creates a map. A map is a way to view many geo-


4

referenced objects at one time. For example, one can view a forest, a hiking trail, a river, and a

lake all on one map, because each of these things has been individually geo-referenced.

Geo-referencing is a strategic management step in planning and monitoring spatially relevant

activities. Many industries rely heavily on geo-referenced information to enable them to

conduct daily resource management activities. By using this information, industries can clearly

view where their resource exists on the landscape, and where they are currently working and

will be working in the future. Forest resource planning is largely dependent on geo-referenced

data that pertains to the forest resource, and the information that defines that data. It allows

the industry to plan current and future operating areas, map road locations to reach operating

areas, and define boundaries for operating areas, in addition to many other things.

This information is just as important to the tourism industry and any other industry that relies

on the natural environment for its existence. By possessing spatial information about tourism

activities, resources and business interests, the industry can plan for the future (i.e. expansion,

modification, etc.) based upon their goals and objectives, and based on the actions of other

industries.

Since there may be various individuals utilizing the landscape in any given location, there may be

many different interests in the natural resources of that location. Based on the different

interests in a given location, there may be a conflict between two or more different parties who

require the same resource to generate revenue. If each of these parties possess spatially geo-

referenced information that pertains to their resource needs, then it becomes much easier to

resolve the conflict. Therefore, geo-referencing tourism values provides the first step towards a

negotiated resolution with other resource-dependant sectors. In addition to this, possessing

geo-referenced information can create a conflict avoidance process. If each potential conflicting

party is aware of where the other is operating on the landscape, they may be able to use proper

planning techniques to avoid conflicts all together. By working together in the planning process,

two conflicting parties may be able to continue to conduct business in harmony.

Advisory Group and Partners

The Geo-Tourism Values Advisory Group (GTVAG) was created to oversee the pilot project. This

working group consists of various parties who are interested or involved in the tourism industry


5

and in resource planning in Newfoundland Labrador. The Advisory Group consists of 14

individuals who created the plan for the pilot project and provided direction and guidance for

the implementation of the project. The individuals who make up the advisory group are listed

below:

Andy Hennebury Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation

Anne Marceau Parks Canada (Gros Morne National Park)

Carol-Ann Gilliard Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador (HNL)

Craig Foley Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador (HNL)

Derek Stewart Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation

Doreen Churchill Center for Environmental Excellence (CEE)

Douglas Piercy Natural Resources Canada (NRCan)

Glenn Payne Geospatial Research Facility (CNA)

Peter Deering Parks Canada (Gros Morne National Park)

Rick Wheeler Geospatial Research Facility (CNA)

Scott Taylor Parks Canada (Gros Morne National Park)

Sean Dolter Western Newfoundland Model Forest (WNMF)

Sue Rendell, Chair Gros Morne Institute for Sustainable Tourism (GMIST)

Todd Wight Newfoundland and Labrador Outfitters Association

The Partners involved in the planning of the pilot project include the following:

- Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador

- Geospatial Research Facility (CNA)

- Natural Resources Canada

- Center for Environmental Excellence (CEE)

- Gros Morne Institute for Sustainable Tourism (GMIST)

- Sir Wilfred Grenfell College

- Western Newfoundland Model Forest Inc.

- Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation

- Gros Morne National Park

- Newfoundland and Labrador Outfitters Association


6

Pilot Study Location

The Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor is located on the west coast of Newfoundland, north of

Deer Lake. The southern boundary of the study area is the Municipality of Deer Lake and the

northern boundary is Gros Morne National Park. The location encompasses two major access

highways for Gros Morne National Park. The area consists of Route 430 (Deer Lake to

Wiltondale), Route 431 (Wiltondale to Lomond) and the surrounding landscape adjacent to

these highway locations. The east – west boundaries extend to both sides of the highways

where any tourism activities are taking place. During the survey process, there were no east-

west boundaries set, and data was collected based on where tourism operators are conducting

activities. At the completion of the survey phase, the extent of these boundaries was defined

and can be viewed in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Map showing the study location for the Geo-referencing of Tourism Values in the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor pilot project.

Gros Morne National Park

Deer Lake


7

The site for this project was chosen for a number of reasons. These highways (Routes 430 and

431) are major access corridors for Gros Morne National Park. Based on the results of the

Vehicular Traffic and Visitor Surveys, it is estimated that Gros Morne National Park received a

total of 158,115 person visits in 60,349 visitor parties from June to October 2004 (D.W Knight

Associates, 2005). The estimate for this measurement period is that 230,693 vehicles visited

and/or traveled through the park. Also from these surveys, it is estimated that 79,803 visitors

(50% of total park visitors) traveled north of the park to visit the communities and attractions of

the Northern Peninsula and the Labrador Straits (D.W Knight Associates, 2005). In order for

these visitors to reach the park from the south, they must travel through the study area.

Therefore, this study location is subject to a large number of residents and tourists views

throughout the summer and the rest of the year. These people see many of the activities that

exist within the viewshed of the highways and therefore formulate opinions and views based

upon what they see.

First, there is active forest management taking place within the corridor, south of Gros Morne

National Park. This area has been managed for its forest resources for a number of years. Corner

Brook Pulp & Paper Ltd. (CBPPL) has timber rights on most of the landscape within the study

area. This means that many of the areas within the viewshed of the highways, and those areas

that are beyond the viewshed are included in long-term management strategies and annual

operating plans. The forest consists predominantly of Balsam Fir (Abies balsamea), Black Spruce

(Picea mariana), White Spruce (Picea glauca), and White Birch (Betula papyrifera). The first 3 of

these species are valued for their pulp quality and are therefore utilized for paper production at

the CBPPL mill in Corner Brook.

Secondly, there are a large number of tourism operators that are active within the study area.

These operators utilize the landscape to provide tourism opportunities for tourists who are

interested in exploring Newfoundland Labrador’s landscape. They provide activities such as

hiking, snowmobiling, mountain biking, scenic tours, snowshoeing, skiing, camping, fishing,

hunting and many more. For the purpose of this pilot project the following operations were

identified: approximately 18 operators who provide tourism activities within the study area, and

10 who provide accommodations. Of these, 7 operators provide both accommodations and

tourism activities. These operators provide approximately 62 full-time and 95 part-time jobs for

people in the area. There are in fact many more operators who operate in this area. Tourism


8

operators feel that this is an excellent place to conduct tourism activities because the landscape

is rich with tourism potential and the characteristics of the landscape are very appealing to

tourists.

The fact that there are at least two industries on the landscape, each with their own set of

values that they require to maintain a sustainable industry, validates the reasoning for this

project. There exists a conflict of interest between the various industries, and for the purpose of

this study we examined tourism and forestry industries, and therefore there exists an

opportunity to give each an equal position for negotiating when conflicting landscape issues

arise.

Conflicting Management Uses in Western Newfoundland

Growth of the Tourism Industry

Newfoundland and Labrador has experienced a significant increase in visitations from non-

resident tourists over the past years – a 55% increase in numbers from 1996 to 2006. In 2006,

there were 496,400 non-resident visits recorded, an increase of 6% over 2005. The tourism

industry is now contribution over $840 million to the provincial economy.

In 2006 in Western Newfoundland, the Deer Lake Airport reported 63,300 passenger

movements, up 5% over 2005. In the first seven months of 2007 these numbers were up 17%

over same period in 2006. There has been an increase in international tourists investing in

properties in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Scenery, landscape, whales, icebergs and outdoor activities, (such as hiking, sea kayaking, and

skiing) are among the main reasons visitors cite as their decision to visit Newfoundland and

Labrador. The adventure product that Newfoundland and Labrador has to offer has become

increasingly popular. There is an increased offering of wilderness adventure tours. The

wilderness adventure companies rely on the landscape in the province (i.e. the mountains,

wildlife, vegetation, rivers, lakes, ocean, etc.) to provide the “wow” factor for their customers.


9

Other Management Uses in Western Newfoundland

In addition to an increasing number of tourists and tourism operators in the Deer Lake to Gros

Morne Corridor, there are other resource-dependant parties. Corner Brook Pulp and Paper Ltd.

(CBPPL) have been operating within the corridor since the late 1930’s. Cutting for the original

mill started in the 1920’s and Bowater (and now CBPPL) have had the timber rights to the area

since 1938 as a part of the Bowater Act (Churchill, 2007). CBPPL has developed five-year plans

for the districts encompassing the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor, and have developed

Sustainable Forest Management Plans for the areas in which they operate. The five year

operating plans show the proposed harvesting areas in the corridor for the next 10 years. CBPPL

Woodlands employs 600 employees in their harvest and silviculture operations in almost 50

Newfoundland and Labrador communities. The Company employs another 700 people at the

mill in Corner Brook and the Deer Lake Power Company (Corner Brook Pulp and Paper Ltd.,

2007). This equates to a large number of jobs and revenue produced on the west coast of the

island. CBPPL has faced a lot of issues in the past. Some of the major issues include the high

Canadian dollar, high fiber costs, the oversupply of newsprint in the North American

marketplace, falling newsprint prices, and extreme pressure being placed on the productive land

base from sources such as viewshed issues, recreational cabins, wildlife reserves, municipal

issues and agriculture (Churchill, 2007).

Another major resource-dependant group that exists in the corridor is the residents. Historically,

Newfoundlander’s have lived off the land, and have used its resources to sustain life. Although

personal sustenance off the land in Newfoundland is not as important as it once was, many

people do still rely on the land and its resources. In the corridor, domestic harvesting provides

wood for fire (heat), and logs for building supplies for many residents.

Mining is another major industry in Newfoundland. The Mining and Oil Extraction industry

contributed 2,633.8 million dollars to the GDP in 2006 (Newfoundland and Labrador Statistics

Agency, 2007). Although mining is not a predominant industry in this particular study area, it

deserves mention because of the possibility of the industry being developed in the area in the

future.


10

Conflict between Industries

Since there are multiple industries on the land that rely on the natural resources in different

ways, conflicts arise. In many areas of Canada, outdoor tourism is often in conflict with other

resource users such as forestry, mines, urban development and Native Land Claims (Canadian

Tourism Commission, 2001). For example, Corner Brook Pulp and Paper, its employees, and

shareholders rely on the forest to provide fiber for paper production. In an area where the

company is extracting the timber resource for paper production, tourism operators may rely on

the forest to provide revenue for their businesses. For example, an operator may lead hiking

trails or scenic tours in an area where the timber is being extracted. In an area like this, there is

a conflict of interest. One industry requires the removal of trees to provide a product that

supports many jobs in the area, and another industry requires the trees to remain on-site so

they can continually provide the wilderness experience. In this example, the action or inaction of

one industry directly affects the actions of the other. If harvesting takes place, the tourism

operator will likely feel the effects, and if the harvesting does not take place, the forest industry

will lose revenue, which may in turn result in the loss of jobs. This creates an area of conflict.

Another example is evident within the viewshed of the highway corridor from Deer Lake leading

into Gros Morne National Park. Some of the forested areas that can be viewed from the

highway, when traveling to and from the park are included in Corner Brook Pulp and Paper’s

long term and annual operating plans. That is, the areas are part of a long term management

plan that has been developed to sustainably manage the forest resource. Some of these areas

have been harvested and therefore can be seen from the highway. The visual quality of the

landscape is part of the wilderness experience and is also part of our everyday life (Paquet,

2001). Many tourism operators in this particular area suggest that these harvested areas directly

affect the tourist’s perception, as they suggest tourists don’t like to see clearcuts, and this

reduces the visitor’s tourism experience.

These conflicts can arise on two scales, each of which can be identified individually using the

map layers produced during this project. The first is on a landscape scale. These conflicts arise

over large geographic areas. An example is the study location for this project. The Deer Lake to

Gros Morne Corridor encompasses a large track of land where multiple parties exist. The pulp

and paper industry manages the forest throughout most of the area, and the tourism industry


11

includes many businesses and individuals who use the same land. Therefore, there is a

landscape conflict. The second conflict could arise in a specific area within the landscape. An

example is when a pulp and paper company wants to extract the timber from an area where a

hunting guide has been bringing clients hunting for many years. The actions of the pulp and

paper company and the tourism operator thus conflict one another.

In theory, the effects of these types of conflicts may be potentially minimized using this project’s

output (i.e. the GIS data that allows individual operators to map their specific business

interests). If properly utilized, the map layers can be overlaid with planned harvest blocks so

that these conflict areas can be identified prior to the actual conflict arising. Large areas that will

be negatively impacted by the others utilization of the natural resources can be identified and a

negotiated resolution can potentially be reached. It does not, however, provide all of the tools

that an operator will need in order to negotiate with the competing industry.

Geo-referencing tourism values projects have taken place in the past in Western Newfoundland.

A report by (Nicol & Nicol, 1999)was completed to locate and note non-timber values in Forest

Management District 15. The report identified 29 different non-timber values to help Corner

Brook Pulp and Paper Limited to develop a five-year operating plan which addresses a broad

range of forest values (Nicol & Nicol, 1999).

The following is an example of how geo-referenced information can be used for planning

purposes to accommodate multiple industries on landscapes in Newfoundland. Figures 3 - 5

show an example of how this pilot project and its outputs can potentially be used to resolve a

landscape conflict. Figure 3 shows a simulated planned harvest block, where the timber will be

extracted to provide fiber for paper production.


12

Figure 2. Simulated planned harvest block. The timber within the red hatched area is planned to be harvested to produce fiber for paper production.

Figure 4 shows a geo-referenced hiking trail used by a large number of tourism operators for

tours. Notice that the hiking trail is within the area that is planned for harvest. Figure 5 shows a

possible resolution. The pulp and paper company has agreed to re-shape the planned harvest

block, and may have to suffer a small loss of fiber in this particular harvest block, and the

tourism industry has agreed to re-route a small proportion of the hiking trail to minimize the

impacts on the tourism operators. The portion of landscape removed from this particular

harvest block will be negotiated and will have to be added to another operating area, to ensure

fiber is still extracted for the mill. The tourism industry will have to live with indirectly viewing

the harvest block for a couple of years, until the harvested area has greened-up, but the harvest

block is not directly in or on the hiking trail, and therefore the trail will not be damaged as a

result of harvesting. (*This example does not take into consideration roads that will be built to

access the timber resource).


13

Figure 3. Hiking trail in the area that has been planned for harvest. Since the landscape is being used by two industries, there is a conflict of interest.

Figure 4. A potential conflict resolution for both parties. The forest industry has to accept less fiber from this particular harvest block, and the tourism industry must re-route the trail and live with viewing the harvest block for a couple of years, until the block has greened-up.


14

In the previous example, by simply using these tourism values maps produced in this project,

the tourism industry was able take a proactive approach to minimize the impact of a conflicting

land issue before the impacts were irreversible.

Another way that has been used to accommodate multiple industries on a single landscape is

through the use of visual design and landscape architecture. Because of the increasing trend

towards managing our forest landscapes for aesthetic or social purposes (Pedersen, 2001) there

has been a lot of interest in using integrated visual design to minimize and resolve conflicts

between industries. Visual design allows for the ‘digital’ design of landscapes prior to

management activities. For example, before a forest company harvests a forest stand, they are

able to visually model the harvest block. That is, they can see what the harvest block will look

like on a computer, and how it will affect the visual quality from various viewpoints in the area.

Using this technique, two parties can work together to design a management activity that

accommodates and meets the expectations of each party. Therefore, visual impacts can be

minimized upon individual tourism activities, highway corridors, and on any other areas that are

visually sensitive. (Pedersen, 2001) stated that civil societies have become more concerned with

the condition of the environment. They are not only sensitive to what our forest practices mean

from a biological conservation viewpoint, but are also concerned with how they look, and what

this means from a socio-economic standpoint with respect to non-consumptive opportunities

and users of the forest. Since people are more interested and concerned about ‘how the forest

looks’, visual resource management is an excellent way to minimize the impacts of ‘visually

undesirable landscapes’.

The BC Forest Service found that “one of our many challenges is to meet the ever-present

demand for fiber while maintaining visual quality and meeting the needs of the growing

recreation and tourism sectors” (Pedersen, 2001). During the early to mid 1980’s, the BC Forest

Service concentrated its efforts on carrying out visual landscape inventories to identify those

areas in the province that are visually sensitive, and by 1996, 12.9 million hectares of sensitive

area had been inventoried (Pedersen, 2001)). (Rennie, 2001) found that the key considerations

in forest management have changed from historically concentrating on efficiency and utility, to

become more ecosystem based, with more concentration on social values such as aesthetics

and conservation. There is a much greater public participation in management planning than

there was historically, and the number of forest users are becoming greater in numbers and


15

more diverse and concentrated. (Rennie, 2001) found that there are many benefits of integrated

visual design. They include: the ability to accommodate a wide range of resource values (not just

visual), the visual component is present throughout the process, the final design is based upon

the long-term and permanent features, and the flexibility (i.e. the design is flexible to changing

conditions and information).

The following figures (Figure 6 – 7) show examples of 3D visualization software, and its ability to

simulate harvested areas prior to actual harvesting.

Figure 5. 3D Visualization software used to evaluate harvest areas prior to harvesting (3D Nature, LLC, 2006).

Figure 6. 3D Visualization software used to evaluate harvest areas viewed from a highway prior to harvesting (3D Nature, LLC, 2006).


16

Another way that conflicting land and visual issues have been dealt with in other areas of

Canada is through the use of partial harvesting. Partial harvesting involves only removing a

portion of a forest stand when harvesting, minimizing the visual impact of the management.

(Marc, 2001) stated that partial cutting doesn’t affect the scenic values because you are only

taking out a portion of the stand each time. Partial cutting can result in less visual impact, more

volume over the short-term, elimination of adjacency constraints, and the ability to address

multiple objectives more readily than when using clearcutting (Marc, 2001).

Partial harvesting has not been widely used in Newfoundland for a number of reasons. The cost

of partial harvesting is much higher than clearcutting, because there is less volume being

removed in each pass. Newfoundland already has some of the highest wood costs (the cost of

getting wood fiber from the stump to the mill) in the world because of the terrain

characteristics, tree size, trucking distances, etc. There is also a lack of equipment and expertise

for conducting partial harvesting. Also, partial harvesting does not suit the tree species existing

in Newfoundland. One of the forests major tree species for example, Balsam Fir, is a short-lived

species and after approximately 60-80 years of age it becomes highly susceptible to wind

damage. Therefore, the remaining stems in a partially harvested block would be very susceptible

to wind damage because there would be less protection compared to higher density stands.

Also, a major problem in Newfoundland has been insect damage to tree species. Studies have

shown that low-density stands are more susceptible to insects such as the balsam fir sawfly.

Because of this, partial harvesting may create a situation where stands become more

susceptible to damage.

When comparing clearcutting with shelterwood (partial) harvesting, (Mierau, 2001) found that

partial harvesting caused increased moisture competition, poor leader growth, and low

densities for regenerating tree species and also found that it took a long time for visual green-up

of harvested blocks.

Methodology

Research

In order to obtain the data necessary to create a geo-database that accurately represented the

tourism operator’s specific business interests within the study area, a number of steps were


17

taken. Research was completed to obtain a list of operators that are actively providing tourism

activities within the area. This was completed with the help of the advisory committee, and

through local resources that have information pertaining to tourism within the pilot corridor and

on the west coast of Newfoundland. The operators who were surveyed consisted of any tourism

operators and/or outfitters who were actively providing a tourism product to generate revenue

for their business within the corridor. Information was not collected pertaining to recreational

tourism opportunities (i.e. those that are for leisure and not-for-profit). This project’s primary

focus was to test the methodology for obtaining information about tourism business interests

and values in the pilot corridor, and the resulting database of survey responses does not

accurately represent all of the tourism values in the Deer Lake to Gros Morne corridor.

Surveying

Once the list of operators was compiled, each operator was contacted and given some

information about the pilot project (i.e. why the project is taking place and what benefit it

would provide them in the future). During the first conversation with each operator, a meeting

time was set up when the surveys could be completed to collect the information necessary for

the project. The surveyor then traveled to meet each operator at their location to complete

each survey. When the surveyor arrived at each destination, one or two surveys were

conducted. Each of these surveys is explained below.

Survey #1

Survey #1 was designed to obtain information from operators and outfitters who are located

within the corridor, and/or who conduct activities within the corridor to generate revenue for

their company. A copy of this survey can be viewed in Appendix A. The survey was designed to

extract data from individual operators and outfitters that pertained to their company and the

activities that they offer to their clients. The survey had 4 main goals. They include:

1). To obtain information that pertains specifically to the tourism activities that each operator

offers. The data which was collected included: which activity each operator offers to clients (i.e.

hiking, fishing, snowmobile tours, etc.), the time of the year that each is offered, the number of

weeks that each is offered, and if the operator uses forest access roads and/or highways for

each of the activities.


18

2). To obtain information about the impact that various land uses has had on their individual

activities. The data that was collected included: the effect that 8 land uses have had on each

activity, major concerns that the operators have pertaining to competing uses in the forest, and

the effect of various harvesting techniques on the activities.

3). To obtain information about the landscape characteristics and aesthetic values that are

important for each of the activities. The data that was collected included: which characteristics

of the landscape are important for each of the activities, and what characteristics are important

for assigning a landscape an associated visual quality.

4). To obtain information specific to each company. The data which was collected included: how

long the company has been in operation, what percent of the gross revenue is generated by

each activity, what percent of clients are residents of Newfoundland and Labrador and which

are not residents of Newfoundland and Labrador, how long each activity has been offered, how

many full and part time staff are employed, the number of clients annually for each activity, the

percent of clients that are walk-in clients and/or pre-booked clients, the percent of clients that

are day customers (i.e. they provide business for less than 24 hours) and those that stay

overnight, and the annual gross revenue generated by each company.

Survey #2

Survey #2 was designed to obtain information from operators and outfitters who use, or have

clients that use the highways within the corridor (i.e. Routes 430, 431, and/or 422) to reach their

destination. This group consisted of the operators located within the corridor (i.e. those who are

actively conducting tourism operations within the corridor) and operators who are located

outside of the corridor, but whose clients use the highways within the corridor to access their

destination. Many other operators have clients who use this corridor. A copy of this survey can

be viewed in Appendix B.

Obtaining Map Data

In addition to completing the survey(s), each operator who completed Survey #1 was asked to

draw on a map, the specific locations where each activity is offered. This was done to obtain

hardcopy map data pertaining to the geographic location for each of the activities. Operators

were asked to show where on the landscape they provide the activities. This involved identifying


19

on a map (i.e. drawing) exactly where each activity took place. Operators showed each road,

river, highway, forest area, trail, etc. where each activity took place.

To obtain this data, a series of four (4) 1:50,000 scale topographic maps were used, which

covered the study area. The topographic maps that were used included map sheets 12H/3,

12H/4, 12H/5, and 12H/6. Each topographic map was overlaid by a clear, see-through Mylar

sheet, which represented each respective map sheet. On each Mylar sheet, the corners of the

topographic maps were marked with an “x” so that each time the Mylar was placed upon the

topographic map the area that was represented was exactly the same.

For each operator, the location of each of their activities was drawn on the Mylar sheet. With

the aid of the surveyor, the area representing each activity was drawn with a coloured marker

or crayon. On each Mylar sheet, each operator was differentiated by a colour and/or line design

(example: dashed green, solid red, dotted black, etc.). By doing this, many different operators

could be represented on a single Mylar sheet, eliminating the need to purchase additional

materials. After all operators were surveyed, the Mylar sheets contained the data that was

needed to create the visual geo-database (i.e. the lines, points and polygons that can be viewed

on a map).

Digitizing Map Data

The hardcopy map data was digitized to produce digital spatial data that could be viewed using

computer software. Digitizing is the process of turning hardcopy mapping data (i.e. the lines,

points and polygons represented on the Mylar sheets) into digital data that can be viewed on a

computer (i.e. in computer mapping programs).

Various methods can be used to digitize hardcopy map data. For this project, the map data was

digitized on-screen using ArcGISTM. ArcGISTM is full-featured GIS software program for visualizing,

analyzing, creating, and managing data with a geographic component (ESRI Canada). Using this

software, previously geo-referenced topographic maps were loaded on–screen. The data that

was drawn on the Mylar sheets was then “digitized” onto the same locations on the digital

topographic maps as a point (ex: cabin location), line (ex: hiking trail), or polygon (ex: hunting

area). After each activity was digitized, it was then saved as a shapefile (i.e. the digitized data

that represents each tourism activity). A series of shapefiles then represented the geographic


20

spatial location for the specific operator’s surveys regarding their tourism activities in the

corridor.

Creating the Geo-Database

Creating a geo-database that accurately reflected the tourism activities of each of the operators

surveyed involved linking the digitized map data to the information pertaining to that data,

which was collected in the tourism operator surveys. A geo-database supports a model of

topologically integrated feature classes, and allows the user to store various features (i.e. geo-

referenced tourism activities). The geo-database was created using mapping software, more

specifically ArcGIS 9.1.

To begin creating the geo-database, all shapefiles (i.e. geo-referenced tourism activities)

representing the tourism activities of each of the operators surveyed were moved into the geo-

database. Next, the attributes (i.e. information about the shapefiles, from the surveys) were

linked to each tourism activity. To achieve this, various relationship tables were set up to link

various sources of information to each tourism activity. Objects in the real-world system often

have particular relationships with other objects in the database (Booth, Crosier, Clark, &

MacDonald, 2002). These kinds of associations between objects in the geo-database are called

relationships (Booth, Crosier, Clark, & MacDonald, 2002). For example, 1 snowmobile trail on

the tourism activities map may be used by various operators. These various operators may offer

different tours, at different times of the winter. The ‘relationship’ between a snowmobile trail,

and the various operators that use it can be defined within the geo-database, so that when

someone looks for information about a specific snowmobile trail, they can view all of the various

operators that use that trail, and the information that is associated with each individual

operator.

During the creation of the geo-database various types of information were linked to each

tourism operator’s activities in the map layer. For an individual tourism activity on the map

layer, the following attributes can be viewed and mapped:

- Tourism operator offering each activity;

- Location and contact information for the operator;

- The survey number for each activity;


21

- The season in which each activity is offered;

- The number of weeks each activity is offered;

- The number of years that each activity has been offered;

- The number of staff employed on each activity (this may overlap with other tourism

activities offered by a particular operator).

This information is important when dealing with conflicting land uses for individual operators. In

a conflict area, with this type of geo-referencing tool available to them, individual operators can

better identify their business interests.

Materials

There were various materials necessary for the implementation of the pilot project. All materials

that were used during the project are listed below:

1). Data Collection:

- 4 x 1:50,000 topographic maps

- Clear Mylar overlay sheets (enough to cover the 4 topographic maps)

- Various colored markers

- Various colored map pencils

- Operator surveys

- Vehicle (to travel to meetings)

2). Creation of the Geo-database:

- ArcGISTM computer software

- Computer

- Digital topographic maps

Results and Discussion

Businesses Surveyed

In total, 30 businesses were surveyed, and 47 surveys were administered. Table 1 shows the

businesses that were surveyed in the area, and others that were not surveyed for reasons


22

beyond the surveyor’s control. Four businesses that were contacted were unable to conduct the

survey due to lack of time.

Table 1 identifies the tourism establishments within or near the Deer Lake to Gros Morne

corridor that were surveyed. It is not a complete list of tourism activities or values in the project

area but rather a list of participants for the pilot project.

Table 1. Operators within or near the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor that were asked to complete either

Survey 1, 2 or both.

Operator Survey #1 Survey #2

White Hills Lodge Yes Yes Big Falls Lodge

Lomond River Lodge Yes Yes

Newfoundland Insectarium Yes Yes

Humber Valley Resort Yes Yes

Funland Resort Yes Yes

Nature Trails Yes No

My Newfoundland Adventures No Yes

Lush’s Cottages Yes Yes

International Appalachian Trail Association No Yes

Cycle Solutions Yes Yes

Jack Ladder Snowmobiling Ltd. Yes Yes

Middle Brook Cabins No Yes

Tuckamore Expeditions Yes Yes

Explore Newfoundland Yes No

Gros Morne Adventures No Yes

Vision: The Atlantic Canada Co. No Yes

Long Range Adventures No Yes

A Perfect Getaway No Yes

Atlantic Canada Adventure Yes No

Cache Rapids Stable Yes Yes

Wilderness Horizons Yes Yes

Victorian Manor No Yes

Rocky Brook Cabins Yes Yes

Wildland Tours Yes Yes

Fisherman’s Landing Inn Yes Yes

Oceanview Motel No Yes

Old Lincon Cabins Yes Yes

Humberview Bed & Breakfast Yes No

Tujummiuvik Bed & Breakfast Yes Yes

Frontier Cottages Yes No

Gateway to the North RV Park No No

Mountain Tours & Photography No No

Edge Tours and Rentals No No

Deer Lake RV and Campground No No


23

Tourism Activities and Accommodations in the Corridor

Table 2 summarizes the various activities that are available to tourists, within the corridor as

identified by the pilot project participants. This does not represent all of the activities,

resources, values and business interests within the corridor.

Table 2. Summary of tourism activities and accommodations identified by survey participants in the pilot

region.

Tourism Activity # of Operators Offering

Tourism Activity Season Tourism Activity is

Offered

ATV Tours 3 Spring / Summer / Fall

Bear Hunting 1 Spring / Summer

Bed & Breakfast 2 All Year

Berry Picking 1 Summer / Fall

Bird Watching 2 All Year

Camping 6 Spring / Summer / Fall

Canoeing 3 Spring / Summer / Fall

Caribou Hunting 1 Fall

Dog Sledding 1 Winter

Hiking 4 All Year

Horseback Riding 1 All Year

Kayaking 2 Spring / Summer / Fall

Lodging 10 All Year

Mini Golf 1 Summer

Moose Hunting 1 Fall

Motor Coach Tours 1 Summer / Fall

Mountain Biking 1 Summer / Fall

Insectarium 1 Summer

Photography Tours 1 Spring / Summer / Fall

Plant Viewing 2 Spring / Summer / Fall

Restaurant 2 All Year

Salmon Fishing 4 Summer

Ski Touring 1 Winter

Snowmobiling 7 Winter

Snowshoeing 2 Winter

Trout Fishing 4 Spring / Summer

Walking 1 Summer / Fall

Water Slides / Swimming 1 Summer

As can be seen in Table 2, there are a large number of activities being provided within the

corridor. Some of these are offered in all seasons while others are only offered at specific times

of the year (i.e. moose hunting, snow shoeing) due to seasonal restrictions. Many of these

activities have been offered for a long period of time (i.e. salmon fishing), and others have only


24

just began, likely because the demand for such tourism activities has increased. As tourism

businesses grow and develop, it is likely that the number and diversity of tourism activities will

also grow and develop.

Surveys

In total, 47 surveys were conducted during the duration of the project. Of these, 22 of the

surveys were Survey #1 (discussed in previous sections), and 25 were Survey #2. The

approximate time to complete Survey #1 was quite variable and relied heavily on the number of

tourism activities that the operator offered. The length of time to complete the surveys ranged

from 20 minutes to 3.0 hours, with an average time for Survey #1 being approximately 45

minutes and Survey #2 at around 15 minutes.

Survey #1 included various questions that were not used to create the geo-database. Since each

project subsequent to the pilot project will be unique and may require the acquisition of

different data due to the goals and objectives of the specific project, a revised survey has been

created and can be seen in Appendix C. This survey shows the questions that are necessary to

get the information to create a mapping layer or geo-database representing tourism operators

business interests in an area.

Survey #1 allowed the surveyor to highlight information about the operators who operate

within the corridor, the tourism industry, in general, and the way in which the operators use the

landscape.

Limitations

Throughout the duration of the pilot project, the surveyor/author has seen many drawbacks and

opportunities that could affect the success of future projects. The following are observations of

this pilot project. They also highlight a number of information gaps identified with this process

that could help to enhance future projects and provide the results that are deemed optimal by

the interested parties.

1. This pilot project tested a potential mechanism (i.e. Surveys) to assist individual

operators identify their business interests and have them represented in a spatial


25

format. In doing so, it may assist individual operators resolve and avoid conflicts with

other industries in the corridor. The methodology employed for identifying tourism

values to be geo-referenced in this project (i.e. conducting surveys), however, is quite

time-consuming, sometimes taking up to three hours to complete. This doesn’t include

the time it took for the surveyor to make contact, set up appointments and travel to the

destination.

In addition, the methodology required the hiring of a surveyor and travel to the region

in order to collect the data, which required significant financial resources.

As competing use conflicts must be resolved in negotiation with the individual operators

as they arise, it is important to provide a user-friendly methodology for collecting the

data and geo-referencing the information. Having to wait for a project to be initiated,

funding partners established and a surveyor hired is not a practical approach to future

projects of this nature.

2. Survey #1 asked operators to rate the various methods of forest harvesting and other

competing uses. As these questions are subjective in nature and do not serve any

purpose in the outcome of the project (i.e. to identify tourism business interest on a

map), they should be removed from the list of questions. Survey # 2 asked participants

to rate photographs on their aesthetic quality. This is subjective and does not serve a

purpose for the objectives of the project.

3. The methodology also does not identify all of the tourism values in the region or other

“potential tourism expansion areas” that are important for the sustainability of the

industry.

4. The pilot project cannot be used as a report of the wider general tourism values, as we

cannot draw conclusions based on this sample size of the impacts of forestry on tourism

visitation.

5. The objective of the project was to merely provide a spatial representation of the

individual tourism business interests. It does not, however, provide all of the tools that

an operator will need in order to negotiate with the competing industry. As tourism


26

operators have varying degrees of knowledge and competencies, they may not know

what is necessary for the sustainability of the industry. There is a need for more

education of tourism operators regarding the sustainability requirements for their

industry relative to other land and water users.

6. For large-scale tourism values mapping projects elsewhere in Newfoundland and

Labrador, a revised list of questions should be developed in order to best capture all the

information that is necessary to create tourism mapping layers.

Conclusion

While the proposed methodology obtained some of the necessary information for individual

tourism interests to be geo-referenced, the process does not address the needs of the tourism

operators who would use the spatial representation in a conflict. Conflicts are arising

throughout Newfoundland and Labrador that are affecting individual tourism operators and not

necessarily tourism regions. In this way, it is difficult to identify how the proposed methodology

would work for those operators. It is impractical from a financial and human resource

perspective to apply the piloted methodology on an individual case by case basis. The tourism

industry would be better served by developing the technology that will collect data from those

individual operators who are experiencing a conflict as they arise so that they may employ the

use of spatial representation to aid in a resolution.

The second phase of this pilot project is designed to address this very limitation. Phase II will be

primarily focused on designing and developing a web-based interface so that individual

operators could render a map of their business interests and values for use in competing uses

resolution. In addition, in reference to the shortcomings of the survey methodology, access to

the information in this web-based system should be limited.


27

Works Cited

3D Nature, LLC. (2006). 3D Landscape Design and Visualization Software. Retrieved June 4, 2007,

from http://3dnature.com/

Booth, B., Crosier, S., Clark, J., & MacDonald, A. (2002). Building a Geodatabase: GIS by ESRI.

Redlands, California.

British Columbia Integrated Land Management Bureau. (2001). Tourism Opportunities Studies.

Retrieved April 26, 2007, from http://ilmbwww.gov.bc.ca/cis/initiatives/tourism/index.html

British Columbia Ministry of Small Business, Tourism & Culture. (2000). Ministry of Small

Business, Tourism & Culture. Retrieved May 30, 2007, from Forest & Fisheries Tourism

Opportunities Study for the 100 Mile & Horsefly Forest Districts of British Columbia: Project

Report: http://ilmbwww.gov.bc.ca/cis/initiatives/tourism/tos/Horse100/horsefly.pdf

British Columbia Ministry of Small Business, Tourism & Culture. (2001). Ministry of Small

Business, Tourism & Culture. Retrieved May 30, 2007, from Tourism Opportunity Strategy for the

Columbia Forest District.:

http://ilmbwww.gov.bc.ca/cis/initiatives/tourism/tos/Columbia/toc.htm

Burton, R. (2001). Using Landscape Architecture and Silviculture Techniques in the Roadside

Landscape. Visual Stewardship of the Working Forest Conference, Compendium of Papers

Presented, (pp. 163-168). Kamloops, BC.

Canadian Tourism Commission. (2001). Retrieved May 13, 2007, from Outdoor Tourism: An

Industry Profile and Resource Guide: www.coprorate.canada.travel

Churchill, M. (2007, June 14). Email from Matthew Churchill. [email protected].

Corner Brook, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.

Corner Brook Pulp and Paper Ltd. (2007). Corner Brook Pulp and Paper. Retrieved May 27, 2007,

from Woodlands Department: http://www.cbpp.com/

D.W Knight Associates. (2005). Gros Morne National Park Visitor Assessment 2004: Summary

Report. Parks Canada.


28

ESRI Canada. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2007, from ESRI Canada:

http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/arcview/index.html

Jennings, D. (2002). Geo-referencing Non-Timber Values: A Project Designed to aid in Forest

Management Planning Strategies. Corner Brook, NL: Western Newfoundland Model Forest.

Marc, J. (2001). Managing Visual Resources Through Partial Cutting. Visual Stewardship of the

Working Forest Conference, Compendium of Papers Presented (pp. 33-40). Kamloops, British

Columbia: British Columbia Ministry of Forests.

Mierau, G. (2001). The Use of Silvicultural Systems to Meet Visual Quality Objectives. Visual

Stewardship of the Working Forest Conference, Compendium of Papers Presented (pp. 63-74).

Kamloops, British Columbia: British Columbia Ministry of Forests.

Newfoundland and Labrador Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation. (2006).

Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation Backgrounder Year-End Regional Tourism

Performance 2005. Retrieved May 31, 2007, from http://www.stats.gov.nl.ca/statistics/Tourism

Newfoundland and Labrador Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation. (2007).

Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation Backgrounder Year-End Regional Tourism

Performance 2006. Retrieved May 31, 2007, from http://www.stats.giv.nl.ca/statistics/Tourism

Newfoundland and Labrador Statistics Agency. (2007). Retrieved May 30, 2007, from

http://www.stats.gov.nl.ca/statistics/GDP/GDP_Industry.asp

Nicol, K., & Nicol, K. (1999). Geo-referencing and Economic Values on the Landscape. Corner

Brook, NL: Western Newfoundland Model Forest.

Paquet, J. (2001). Public Preferences of Forest Managment Practices in Quebec. Visual

Stewadship of the Working Forest Conference, Compendium of Papers Presented (pp. 81-86).

Kamloops, BC: British Columbia Ministry of Forests.

Pedersen, L. (2001). Visual Resource Management in British Columbia: Past, Present and Future.

Visual Stewardship of the Working Forest Conference, Compendium of Papers Presented (pp. 87-

98). Kamloops, BC: British Columbia Ministry of Forests.


29

Rennie, P. (2001). Using Integrated Visual Design to Resolve Resource Management Conflicts .

Visual Stewardship of the Working Forest Conference, Compendium of Papers Presented (pp. 99-

106). Kamloops, BC: British Columbia Ministry of Forests.

Scarpa, R., Buongiorno, J., Hseu, J., & Lee, K. (2000). Assessing the Non-Timber Value of Forests:

A Revealed Preference, Hedonic Model. Journal of Forest Economics , 83-107.

West Chilcotin Tourism Association. (2005). Wilderness Tourism Land Base Analysis: Caribou -

Chilcotin Land Use Plan Area. British Columbia.


30

APPENDIX A


31

Operators/Outfitters Conducting Activities within the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor

Survey #1

Western Newfoundland Model Forest & Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador Project: Geo-referencing Tourism Values along the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor


32

Disclaimer Thank you very much for recently agreeing to participate in this study. This is a pilot project being conducted by Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador in partnership with Western Newfoundland Model Forest (WNMF) to delineate and geo-reference tourism values along the corridor reaching from the Humber Valley to the borders of Gros Morne National Park. The project aims to increase knowledge and awareness of the tourism industry through the mapping of tourism values. This is a first step towards a negotiated resolution between various conflicting land uses in the area. Mapping these tourism values can help to create a conflict avoidance process or mechanism for tourism that is transferable to the rest of the province and its national network. None of the information collected in this survey will be released to the public on a basis that is specific to the operator or outfitter. Any financial information about the company will be kept strictly with those conducting the study for research purposes.


33

Company Name: _____________________________ Survey #: ________ Name: _____________________________ Date: ____________ Section 1. Activity Information This section of the survey is aimed at identifying the various ways in which you interact with the landscape. You will be asked to identify the specific activities in which your company participates. Please refer to Table 1 in conjunction with the questions below to complete this section. 1. In Table 1, indicate which of the activities listed in column 2, that your company participates in (please identify any that your company has participated in within the last 3 years). Please check all that apply in column 2. If there are any activities that are not listed in Table 1, please specify in column 2 next to ‘other’. 2. For each activity identified in Question #1, indicate in which season(s) you perform the activity based on the following:

SP Spring S Summer F Fall W Winter A All Year

Place the appropriate code in column 3 of Table 1. Please indicate all that apply. 3. For each activity identified in Question #1, indicate how many weeks you perform the activity annually based on the following: A. 0 - 2 wks B. 2 - 4 wks C. 4 -8 wks D. 8 - 16 wks E. 16 - 32 wks F. 32 +

Place the appropriate letter in column 4 of Table 1. 4. In Table 1, indicate if you or your clients use forest access roads for each of your activities by placing yes or no in column 5. 5. In Table 1, indicate if you or your clients use local highways (i.e. Trans Canada Highway) for each of your activities by placing yes or no in column 6. If so, which highways are most heavily used in this corridor? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Section 2. Impact of Various Land Uses This section of the survey is aimed at identifying how various land uses and management techniques affect your activities within the forest. Please use Table 2 in conjunction with the questions below to complete this section.


34

6. Table 2 identifies various land uses present in Western Newfoundland. For each of those listed in columns 3 – 10, indicate the effect that each has had upon your various activities in the past (i.e. up to this point in time). Use the effect rating below. If there are any other land uses that affect each particular activity, please identify it below and provide the effect rating.

1 Land use has a large positive effect on this particular activity. 2 Land use has a positive effect on this particular activity. 3 Land use has no effect on this particular activity. 4 Land use has a negative effect on this particular activity. 5 Land use has a large negative effect on this particular activity.

Others:__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 7. What are your major concerns pertaining to competing uses in this area? Please check 3 of your major concerns below, and place an “x” next to the one that you are least concerned about. □ Wildlife issues □ Insufficient Buffer Zones □ Scenery / Aesthetics □ Pollution □ Reforestation □ Destruction of the forest □ Chemicals Application □ Clearcutting □ Erosion □ Land Degradation □ Destruction of Snowmobile Trails □ Increased Access to private logging □ Noise Pollution □ Impact on Tourism Industry □ Harvesting Causing Increased Wind □ Crowding (i.e. on fishing rivers) □ Economic Impacts □ Other, please specify below ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 8. Appendix A shows 6 examples of harvesting, labeled A through F. An explanation for each type is given on the next page. Please indicate which of these harvesting types you feel would minimize the impacts of the concerns you outlined in Question #7 (i.e. which of these would be ok in your area and allow your activity(s) to continue after harvest) by circling each letter below. Harvesting Type Description A. Strip Harvesting - The area is clearcut in strips

B. Clearcut with Leave Patches - The area is clearcut, however, patches are left behind

C. Selective Harvesting - Selected trees are removed, however, the majority of the forest is left standing


35

D. Clearcut with Scattered Residuals - The area is clearcut, however, scattered single trees are retained

E. Strip Harvesting with Scattered Residuals - Same as A, however, scattered single trees are retained in cut strips

F. Patch Clearcut - The area is clearcut harvested in small patches

Section 3. Landscape Characteristics and Aesthetic Values This section of the survey is aimed at identifying the surrounding environmental characteristics that provide the location for your company to exist, as well as those characteristics that make your specific activities unique. Please refer to Table 3 in conjunction with the questions below to complete this section. 9. In Table 3, indicate which characteristics about the forest or surrounding landscape make this area suitable for your activities by placing a check in columns 3 – 14 for each activity listed in Question #1. If there are any other landscape characteristics that are important to your activities, please list below, and indicate which activities these characteristics enhance. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 10. What is it about the landscape that makes it aesthetically pleasing in your area? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 11. The following is a list of aesthetic values for forest landscapes. Please identify three of these values which are the most important to your company by placing a check in the space provided to the right. Also, identify one of the values that is the least important to your company by placing an “x” in the space provided to the right.

Aesthetic Value

- Type of Water Present (i.e. lake, pond, river, ocean) ____ - Percent of Water Present in the Landscape ____ - Relative Relief (steepness) of surrounding landscape ____ - Variety of Landforms Present ____ - Variety of Vegetation Present ____ - Type of Alteration (i.e. harvesting, farming, etc.) ____ - Level or Amount of Alteration Present ____ Section 4. Company Information


36

This section of the survey is aimed at obtaining specific information that pertains to your company. The goal is to enable the researchers to understand the value of the tourism industry in the area in terms of job creation, revenue generated, etc. Please refer to Table 4 in conjunction with the questions below to complete this section. 12. How long has your company been in operation? ______________________________ 13. Does your company reside in Newfoundland?

Yes _____ No _____ 14. Approximately what percent of your gross revenue is generated from each of your activities? Place your answer in column 3 of Table 4. 15. For each activity indicated in Question #1, approximately what percent of your business is generated from residents of Newfoundland, and what percent is generated from non-residents? Place your answer in column 4 of Table 4. 16. Have you been participating in the same activities since the company started? If no, please state the amount of time, in years, that you have been participating in each interaction. Place your answer in column 5 of Table 4. ___________________________ 17. How many full-time staff do you employ? __________________________________ 18. How many part-time staff do you employ, and generally what months are they employed?

Number of part-time staff: ___________________________________________ Months of employment: _____________________________________________ 19. Do you have different staff employed on each of your activities? If so, please indicate approximately how many staff work with each of the activities identified in Question #1. Place your answer in column 6 of Table 4. __________________________ 20. How many clients do you have annually for each of the activities listed in Question #1? Place your answer in column 7 of Table 4. 21. Approximately what percent of your business is walk-in business, and what percent is pre-booked business for each of the activities listed in Question #1? Place your answer in column 8 of Table 4. 22. Approximately what percent of your business is day business, and what percent is overnight (package) for each of the activities listed in Question #1? Place your answer in column 9 of Table 4. 23. What is the total gross revenue produced by you company annually? Circle the correct answer. A. $0 – $50,000 /year


37

B. $50,000 - $100,000 / year C. $100,000 - $200,000 / year D. $200,000 - $400,000 /year E. $400,000 + / year

I would like to thank you for your time and cooperation during the completion of this survey. If you have any additional comments or questions, please feel free to express them below. We welcome any additional interests or opinions that you may have. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


38

Table 1. Identification of various forest activities and their intensity and seasonal timing, as well as the type of road usage associated with each activity.

1 2 3 4 5 6

Map ID

Activity Season # of

Weeks Road Usage

Forest Access Highway

ATV Use Snowmobiling Snowshoeing Hiking Walking Trails Berry Picking Plant Viewing Sight Seeing Cross Country Skiing Ski Touring Downhill Skiing Mountain Biking GPS Adventures Bird Watching Dog Sledding Rock Climbing Caving Camping Lodging Canoeing Rafting Moose Hunting Bear Hunting Small Game Hunting Trapping Duck Hunting Bird Hunting Salmon Fishing Trout Fishing Motorcycling Motor Coaching Horseback Riding Geology Photography Tours Other:

Specify_______________

Other: Specify_______________

Other: Specify_______________


39

Table 2. Current and potential impact of various forest land uses on your activities.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Current Effect Of Land Use

Map ID

Activity

Fore

st

Har

vest

ing

Agg

rega

te

Pit

s

Hyd

ro L

ines

Pro

tect

ed

A

reas

Do

mes

tic

Har

vest

ing

Co

ttag

e D

evel

op

me

nt

Ro

ad

Bu

ildin

g

Agr

icu

ltu

re

ATV Use

Snowmobiling

Snowshoeing

Hiking

Walking Trails

Berry Picking

Plant Viewing

Sight Seeing

Cross Country Skiing

Ski Touring

Downhill Skiing

Mountain Biking

GPS Adventures

Bird Watching

Dog Sledding

Rock Climbing

Caving

Camping

Lodging

Canoeing

Rafting

Moose Hunting

Bear Hunting

Small Game Hunting

Trapping

Duck Hunting

Bird Hunting

Salmon Fishing

Trout Fishing

Motorcycling

Motor Coaching

Horseback Riding

Geology

Photography Tours

Other: Specify_____________


40

Table 3. Important landscape characteristics for various forest activities.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Map ID

Activity

Fore

st A

ge

Fore

st

Veg

etat

ion

To

po

grap

hy

Aes

thet

ic

Val

ue

Acc

ess

to

Wild

life

Acc

ess

to

Fish

R

oad

Acc

ess

to

Fore

st

Acc

ess

to

Wat

er

Co

nve

nie

nc

e (p

rice

, p

roxi

mit

y)

Soil

Typ

e

Geo

grap

hic

Fe

atu

res

Un

iqu

e

Feat

ure

s


Specify_____________



41

Table 4. Information pertaining to the company and clientele.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Map ID

Activity %

Rev

enu

e

Res

iden

t

No

n-

Res

iden

t

Year

s fo

r

Each

A

ctiv

ity

# St

aff

for

Each

In

tera

ctio

n

Ap

pro

x #

of

Clie

nts

A

nn

ual

ly

Wal

k-in

Pre

-bo

ok

Day

Ove

r-

nig

ht


Specify___________

Other: Specify___________


42

APPENDIX B


43

Operators/Outfitters Traveling Through the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor to Access Tourism Destinations beyond the Corridor

Survey #2

Western Newfoundland Model Forest & Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador Project: Geo-referencing Tourism Values along the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor


44

Disclaimer Thank you very much for recently agreeing to participate in this study. This is a pilot project being conducted by Hospitality Newfoundland and Labrador in partnership with Western Newfoundland Model Forest (WNMF) to delineate and geo-reference tourism values along the corridor reaching from the Humber Valley to the borders of Gros Morne National Park. The project aims to increase knowledge and awareness of the tourism industry through the mapping of tourism values. This is a first step towards a negotiated resolution between various conflicting land uses in the area. Mapping these tourism values can help to create a conflict avoidance process or mechanism for tourism that is transferable to the rest of the province and its national network. The goal of this particular survey is to identify key areas along the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor which are aesthetically important to the tourism industry. None of the information collected in this survey will be released to the public on a basis that is specific to the operator or outfitter.


45

Company Name: ___________________________ Survey #: __________ Name: ___________________________ Date: _____________ Section 1. Corridor Usage 1. Do you or your clients use Route 430, 431 and/or 422 (hereafter referred to as the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor) to access your business and/or Gros Morne National Park? Yes _____ No _____ 2. Which of the highway routes listed below do you and your clients use when traveling through the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor? Route 430 (Deer Lake to Rocky Harbor) _____ Route 431 (Wiltondale to Woody Point) _____ Route 422 (Cormack) _____ 3. This question is for tour and motor coach operators. Approximately how many times do you and your clients travel through the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor each year? If you operate motor coach tours, how many of your buses pass through the corridor each year? ______________________________________________________________________ 4. This question is for tour and motor coach operators. What is the average number of individuals present in your vehicle when you drive through the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor? ______________________________________________________________________ 5. What seasons do your clients travel via these routes? Circle all that apply. Spring Summer Fall Winter 6. How many weeks of the year do your clients travel through the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor via these routes? A. 0 - 2 wks B. 2 - 4 wks C. 4 -8 wks D. 8 - 16 wks E. 16 - 32 wks F. 32 +

Section 2. Scenic Importance

7. What are the main characteristics of the landscape that your clients value when traveling in the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


46

8. What are some things that your clients dislike about the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 9. What are some of the most scenic areas or notable features in the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor (Use topographic map to identify them if it will help)? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 10. Appendix A shows four groupings of photographs, all of which can be viewed when traveling on Routes 430 and 431 in the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor. Please identify which of these groups of photographs are most significant to your clients when traveling in the corridor by ranking them 1 – 4 (1 being the most important to your clients aesthetically, and 4 being the least important to your clients aesthetically). Group #1 ____ Group #2 ____ Group #3 ____ Group #4 ____ 11. Appendix B shows ten individual photographs. Please rate each photograph from 1 – 15 (15 having a very high aesthetic value, and 1 having a very low aesthetic value). Photo #1 ____ Photo #6 ____ Photo #2 ____ Photo #7 ____ Photo #3 ____ Photo #8 ____ Photo #4 ____ Photo #9 ____ Photo #5 ____ Photo #10 ____

12. Appendix C shows four groups of photographs. Within each group, rate each photograph from 1 – 15 (15 having a very high aesthetic value, and 1 having a very low aesthetic value). Group #1 Picture #1 ____ Picture #3 ____ Picture #2 ____ Picture #4 ____ Group #2 Picture #1 ____ Picture #2 ____ Group #3 Picture #1 ____ Picture #2 ____


47

Group #4 Picture #1 ____ Picture #2 ____ 13. Appendix D shows 8 groups of photographs. Each group represents a geographic location along the Deer Lake to Gros Morne Corridor. If some human land alteration were to take place in the area(s) represented in each group in the near future, please prioritize the groups for alteration. Rank the groups from 1 - 8 (1 being the area you would least want altered and 8 being the one you would first have altered). Group #1 ____ Group #5 ____ Group #2 ____ Group #6 ____ Group #3 ____ Group #7 ____ Group #4 ____ Group #8 ____ I would like to thank you for your time and cooperation during the completion of this survey. If you have any additional comments or questions, please feel free to express them below. We welcome any additional interests or opinions that you may have. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


48

APPENDIX C


49

Survey for Geo-Referencing Tourism Values in Newfoundland Company Name: _____________________________ Survey #: ________ Name: _____________________________ Date: ____________ Section 1. Activity Information This section of the survey is aimed at identifying the various ways in which you interact with the landscape. You will be asked to identify the specific activities in which your company participates. Please refer to Table 1 on page 3 in conjunction with the questions below to complete this section. 1. In Table 1, indicate which of the activities listed in column 2, that your company participates in (please identify any that your company has participated in within the last 3 years). Please check all that apply in column 2. If there are any activities that are not listed in Table 1, please specify in column 2 next to ‘other’. 2. For each activity identified in Question #1, indicate in which season(s) you perform the activity based on the following:

SP Spring S Summer F Fall W Winter A All Year

Place the appropriate code in column 3 of Table 1. Please indicate all that apply. 3. For each activity identified in Question #1, indicate how many weeks you perform the activity annually based on the following: A. 0 - 2 wks B. 2 - 4 wks C. 4 -8 wks D. 8 - 16 wks E. 16 - 32 wks F. 32 +

Place the appropriate letter in column 4 of Table 1. Section 2. Impact of Various Land Uses This section of the survey is aimed at identifying how various land uses and management techniques affect your activities within the forest. Please use Table 2 in conjunction with the questions below to complete this section. 4. Table 2 (page 4) identifies various land uses present in Western Newfoundland. For each of those listed in columns 3 – 10, indicate the effect that each has had upon your various activities


50

in the past (i.e. up to this point in time). Use the effect rating below. If there are any other land uses that affect each particular activity, please identify it below and provide the effect rating.

1 Land use has a large positive effect on this particular activity. 2 Land use has a positive effect on this particular activity. 3 Land use has no effect on this particular activity. 4 Land use has a negative effect on this particular activity. 5 Land use has a large negative effect on this particular activity.

Others:__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Section 3. Landscape Characteristics and Aesthetic Values This section of the survey is aimed at identifying the surrounding environmental characteristics that provide the location for your company to exist, as well as those characteristics that make your specific activities unique. Please refer to Table 3 in conjunction with the questions below to complete this section. 5. In Table 3 (page 5), indicate which characteristics about the forest or surrounding landscape make this area suitable for your activities by placing a check in columns 3 – 14 for each activity listed in Question #1. If there are any other landscape characteristics that are important to your activities, please list below, and indicate which activities these characteristics enhance. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Section 4. Mapping of Tourism Values 6. For all of the activities identified in Question #1, could you please identify on the topographic map the locations where these tourism activities take place on the landscape.


51

Table 1. Identification of various forest activities and their intensity and seasonal timing,

as well as the type of road usage associated with each activity.

1 2 3 4

Map ID

Activity Season # of

Weeks


Specify_______________


52

Table 2. Current and potential impact of various forest land uses on your activities.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Current Effect Of Land Use

Map ID

Activity

Fore

st

Har

vest

ing

Agg

rega

te

Pit

s

Hyd

ro L

ines

Pro

tect

ed

A

reas

D

om

esti

c H

arve

stin

g C

ott

age

Dev

elo

pm

en

t R

oad

Bu

ildin

g

Agr

icu

ltu

re

ATV Use

Snowmobiling

Snowshoeing

Hiking

Walking Trails

Berry Picking

Plant Viewing

Sight Seeing

Cross Country Skiing

Ski Touring

Downhill Skiing

Mountain Biking

GPS Adventures

Bird Watching

Dog Sledding

Rock Climbing

Caving

Camping

Lodging

Canoeing

Rafting

Moose Hunting

Bear Hunting

Small Game Hunting

Trapping

Duck Hunting

Bird Hunting

Salmon Fishing

Trout Fishing

Motorcycling

Motor Coaching

Horseback Riding

Geology

Photography Tours



53

Table 3. Important landscape characteristics for various forest activities.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Map ID

Activity

Fore

st A

ge

Fore

st

Veg

etat

ion

To

po

grap

hy

Aes

thet

ic

Val

ue

Acc

ess

to

Wild

life

Acc

ess

to

Fish

R

oad

A

cces

s to

Fo

rest

A

cces

s to

W

ate

r

Co

nve

nie

nc

e (p

rice

, p

roxi

mit

y)

Soil

Typ

e

Geo

grap

hic

Fe

atu

res

Un

iqu

e

Feat

ure

s


Specify_____________



54

APPENDIX D


55

A B

C D E F

Documents

MFNL - Georeferencing Of Tourism Values